The robustness of a design has a major influence on how much the product's performance will vary and is of great concern to design, quality, and production engineers. While variability is always central to the definition of robustness, the concept does contain ambiguity, and although subtle, this ambiguity can have significant influence on the strategies used to combat variability, the way it is quantified and ultimately, the quality of the final design. In this contribution, the literature for robustness metrics was systematically reviewed. From the 108 relevant publications found, 38 metrics were determined to be conceptually different from one another. The metrics were classified by their meaning and interpretation based on the types of the information necessary to calculate the metrics. Four different classes were identified: (1) sensitivity robustness metrics; (2) size of feasible design space robustness metrics; (3) functional expectancy and dispersion robustness metrics; and (4) probability of compliance robustness metrics. The goal was to give a comprehensive overview of robustness metrics and guidance to scholars and practitioners to understand the different types of robustness metrics and to remove the ambiguities of the term robustness. By applying an exemplar metric from each class to a case study, the differences between the classes were further highlighted. These classes form the basis for the definition of four specific subdefinitions of robustness, namely the “robust concept,” “robust design,” “robust function,” and “robust product.”
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
November 2016
Research-Article
Robustness Metrics: Consolidating the Multiple Approaches to Quantify Robustness
Simon Moritz Göhler,
Simon Moritz Göhler
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: simogo@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: simogo@mek.dtu.dk
Search for other works by this author on:
Tobias Eifler,
Tobias Eifler
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: tobeif@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: tobeif@mek.dtu.dk
Search for other works by this author on:
Thomas J. Howard
Thomas J. Howard
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet, Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: thow@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet, Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: thow@mek.dtu.dk
Search for other works by this author on:
Simon Moritz Göhler
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: simogo@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: simogo@mek.dtu.dk
Tobias Eifler
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: tobeif@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet,
Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: tobeif@mek.dtu.dk
Thomas J. Howard
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet, Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: thow@mek.dtu.dk
Technical University of Denmark,
Produktionstorvet, Building 426,
Kongens Lyngby 2800, Denmark
e-mail: thow@mek.dtu.dk
1Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received February 29, 2016; final manuscript received July 7, 2016; published online September 12, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Zissimos P. Mourelatos.
J. Mech. Des. Nov 2016, 138(11): 111407 (12 pages)
Published Online: September 12, 2016
Article history
Received:
February 29, 2016
Revised:
July 7, 2016
Citation
Moritz Göhler, S., Eifler, T., and Howard, T. J. (September 12, 2016). "Robustness Metrics: Consolidating the Multiple Approaches to Quantify Robustness." ASME. J. Mech. Des. November 2016; 138(11): 111407. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4034112
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Asynchronous Multi-Information Source Bayesian Optimization
J. Mech. Des (October 2024)
Design Optimization of Lattice Structures Under Impact Loading for Additive Manufacturing
J. Mech. Des (November 2024)
Related Articles
A Study to Understand Perceptual Discrepancies Using Visual Illusions and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)
J. Mech. Des (July,2007)
CADDAC: Multi-Client Collaborative Shape Design System with Server-based Geometry Kernel
J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng (June,2003)
Analytical Target Setting: An Enterprise Context in Optimal Product Design
J. Mech. Des (January,2006)
An Approach to Constraint-Based and Mass-Customizable Product Design
J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng (March,2011)
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Chapters
Processing Free Form Objects within a Product Development Process Framework
Advances in Computers and Information in Engineering Research, Volume 1
Getting Ready for Production
Total Quality Development: A Step by Step Guide to World Class Concurrent Engineering
Advances in Modular Design: Optimizing Mechanical Connections For Hi-Mix, Low-Volume Product Designs
Advances in Multidisciplinary Engineering